Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.The North—defined as the Canadian Arctic—ranks among the most understudied and yet the most promising fields of enquiry for Canadian political scientists. It offers a host of fascinating research topics and intellectual puzzles, many of which entail the often fraught relationship between the Canadian state and Aboriginal peoples. Important conceptual issues await academics studying northern politics and governance. As well, political scientists' work can benefit the governments and the people of the North who are grappling with difficult practical problems as they develop distinctive ways of governing themselves. Academic work on northern politics can be at once intellectually stimulating, professionally rewarding and of significant practical utility. Accordingly, more Canadian political scientists, especially young scholars, should turn their attention northwards. Résumé.Le Nord, ou plus précisément l'Arctique canadien, constitue un des champs les moins explorés et pourtant les plus prometteurs pour les politologues canadiens. Son étude révèle une foule de sujets de recherche fascinants et d'énigmes intellectuelles, dont plusieurs se rapportent aux relations souvent tendues entre l'État canadien et les peuples autochtones. D'importants enjeux conceptuels se posent aux chercheurs de la politique nordique et de la gouvernance. De plus, les recherches des politologues peuvent aider les gouvernements et les habitants du Nord à résoudre des problèmes concrets associés au développement de façons distinctives de se gouverner. En somme, la recherche sur la politique nordique peut être à la fois intellectuellement stimulante, professionnellement gratifiante et pourvu d'une grande utilité pratique. En conséquence, plus de politologues canadiens, et en particulier ceux des nouvelles générations, devraient diriger leur attention vers le Nord.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.012 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".